THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  ILLINOIS 

LIBRARY 


FA 
vl"? 


A#V 


**#■ 


THE  LIBRARY  OF  THE 

SEP  2  7  1937 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


Field  Museum  of  Natural  History 

Publication  241 

Anthropological  Series  Vol.  XVII,  No.  1 


A  CORRELATION  OF  THE  MAYAN 
AND  EUROPEAN  CALENDARS 


BY 

J.  Eric  Thompson 

Assistant  Curator  of  Mexican  and  South  American  Archaeology 


Berthold  Laufer 
Curator  of  Anthropology 

EDITOR 


Chicago,  U.  S.  A. 

January,  1927 


PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 
BY  FIELD  MUSEUM  PRESS 


v '/7 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

The  correlation  suggested  in  this  publication  was  first  proposed  as 
long  ago  as  1905  by  J.  T.  Goodman  ("Maya  Dates,"  American  Anthropo- 
logist, New  Series,  Volume  VII).  At  that  time  Goodman's  correlation 
was  unanimously  rejected  by  his  fellow  students  of  Mayology.  The 
chronicle  of  Oxkutzcab  was  then  unknown,  and  the  astronomical  infor- 
mation contained  both  in  the  Dresden  Codex  and  the  monuments  had 
not  been  worked  out.  The  present  contribution  is  offered,  not  in  the 
sure  conviction  that  the  correlation  is  correct,  but  in  the  sincere  belief 
that  it  bears  more  evidence  of  being  the  true  correlation  than  others  yet 
published.  There  is  always  the  possibility  that  the  Maya  time  machine 
had  broken  down  before  the  arrival  of  the  Spaniards,  in  which  case  a 
day  for  day  correlation  based  entirely  on  astronomical  evidence  may 
eventually  be  accepted. 

I  should  like  to  express  my  gratitude  to  Mr.  T.  A.  Joyce  of  the 
British  Museum,  and  Dr.  S.  G.  Morley  of  the  Carnegie  Institution, 
through  whose  writings  I  first  became  acquainted  with  this  fascinating 
subject. 


A  CORRELATION  OF  THE  MAYAN  AND 
EUROPEAN  CALENDARS 

BY  J.  ERIC  THOMPSON 


THE  GENERAL  PROBLEM 

A  day  for  day  correlation  of  the  Maya  and  European  chronologies, 
providing  the  Maya  day  count  continued  to  function  unimpaired  up  to 
the  time  of  the  arrival  of  the  Spaniards,  must  be  based  on  two  distinct 
and  unrelated  sets  of  evidence. 

(i)  The  historical  data  supplied  in  the  books  of  Chilan  Balaam  and 
the  writings  of  the  Spanish  priests  and  conquistadores. 

(2)  The  astronomical  evidence  contained  in  the  monuments  and  the 
Dresden  Codex. 

Unfortunately  the  historical  evidence  is  to  a  large  extent  contradic- 
tory, and  the  astronomical  data  have  been  translated  in  two  different 
ways. 

Correlations  such  as  those  of  Bowditch  and  Morley  have  been  based 
entirely  on  the  historical  data,  and  do  not  fit  in  with  the  astronomical 
evidence,  whereas  the  correlations  of  Willson  and  Teeple  based  on 
astronomical  evidence  alone  are  utterly  at  variance  with  the  historical 
evidence. 

Spinden's  correlation  was  based  on  historical  evidence,  but  subse- 
quently astronomical  evidence  has  been  interpreted  to  fit  in  with  the 
historical  correlation  in  a  manner  which  the  writer  believes  is  not 
correct. 

The  present  correlation  is  an  attempt  to  reconcile  the  historical  and 
astronomical  data. 

THE  HISTORICAL  EVIDENCE 

The  historical  evidence  is  very  fully  dealt  with  by  Morley  in  "The 
Inscriptions  at  Copan,"  and  therefore  it  is  not  presented  here  again  in 
full.  The  evidence  although  in  places  very  conflicting  indicates  that  a 
Katun  13  Ahau  ended  between  1536  and  1541.  The  amount  of  evidence 
actually  favors  1536  as  the  date  of  the  close  of  the  katun,  but  the  most 
reliable  information  indicates  the  year  1539.  This  reliable  document  is 
a  page  of  the  Chronicle  of  Oxkutzcab,  a  collection  of  titles,  family  papers, 
births,  etc.,  of  the  Xiu  family,  who  prior  to  the  Spanish  conquest  were 
one  of  the  ruling  families  of  Yucatan,  and  in  all  probability  the  most 


6  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

important  family  in  the  land.  Along  with  these  family  papers  is  a  page 
of  historical  information  of  the  time  of  the  conquest  signed  below  by 
Don  Jhoan  Xiu,  and  the  statement  that  the  signer  had  copied  it  from 
"an  ancient  book,  namely  in  characters  as  they  are  called,  Anares." 
Morley  has  pointed  out  that  Anares  is  probably  the  same  as  "Analtehes," 
a  word  used  to  describe  hieroglyphic  manuscripts. 

The  following  is  Gates'  translation  of  this  document.  Dots  represent 
places  where  the  text  is  illegible. 

Page  66  of  the  Chronicle  of  Oxkutzcab 

153  .  .  The  tun  on  18  Yaxkin.  The  town  was  desolated  because  of  the 
Maya  dead  in  the  year  .... 

....  5  Kan  being  the  year-bearer  on  Pop  1  .  .  .  .  ahau  the  tun  on 
7  Yaxkin. 

1535     6  Muluc  the  year-bearer  on  Pop  1 the  tun  on  11  Ceh. 

x536     7  Ix  the  year-bearer  on  Pop  1,  3  ahau  on  7  Yaxkin. 

x537  8  Cauac  on  1  Pop,  when  there  died  the  rainbringers  at  Otzmal, 
namely  Ahtz'un  Tutul  Xiu  and  Ahziyah  Napuc  Chi,  and 
Namay  Che  and  Namay  Tun,  and  the  priest  Evan,  ....  men 
at  Mani  they  were,  rainbringers  at  Chichen  Itza  then,  and 
there  escaped  Nahau  Veeh,  Napot  Covoh.  On  10  Zip  it  took 
place,  in  12  Ahau  it  was,  the  tun  on  2  Yaxkin,  that  it  may  be 
remembered. 

1538  9  Kan  the  year-bearer  on  Pop  1 ,  when  there  happened  a  hurricane 
causing  death.   8  Ahau  the  tun  on  16  Xul. 

*539     IO  Muluc  on  Pop  1.   4  Ahau  the  tun  on  11  Xul. 

1540  11  Ix  on  Pop  1.    13  Ahau  the  tun  on  7  Xul. 

1 54 1  12  Cauac  on  Pop  1.   9  Ahau  the  tun  on  2  Xul. 

1542  13  Kan  on  Pop  1  when  the  Spaniards  founded  the  city  Ti-Hoo 

[Merida]  when  they  settled,  and  the  tributes  first  began  through 
those  of  Mani,  and  the  province  was  established  5  Ahau  on 
16  Tzec. 

1543  1  Muluc  on  Pop  1  when  there  died  those  of  Tz'itz'omtun  at  the 

hands  of  the  Spaniards  in  a  battle,  their  captain  being  Alonso 
Lopez.    1  Ahau  it  happened  on  1 1  Tzec. 

1544  2  Ix  on  Pop  1.    10  ahau  on  6  Tzec. 

J545  J3  Cauac  on  Pop  1,  when  began  Christianity  through  the  friars 
here  in  the  town.  These  were  the  names  of  the  fathers,  fray 
Luis  Villapando,  fray  Diego  de  Vehar,  fray  Juan  de  la  Puerta, 
fray  Mechor  de  Benabente,  fray  Julio  de  Herrera,  fray  Angel 
....  they  founded  at  the  city  Ti-Hoo  6  Ahau  the  tun  on  1  Tzec. 


The  Venus  Calendar 


1532 

4  Cauac 

1533 

5  Kan 

1534 

6  Muluc 

1535 

7Ix 

1536 

8  Cauac 

1537 

9  Kan 

1538 

10  Muluc 

1539 

11  Ix 

1540 

12  Cauac 

1541 

13  Kan 

1542 

1  Muluc 

1543 

2lx 

1544 

3  Cauac 

Now  on  the  29th  of  May  in  the  year  1685  I  have  copied  this  from  an 
ancient  book,  namely  in  characters  as  they  are  called  Anares. 

I,  Don  Jhoan  Xiu. 

Now  changing  the  Christian  years  to  correspond  to  the  beginnings 
instead  of  the  endings  of  the  Mayan  years,  and  correcting  the  month 
co-efficients  and  transferring  them  into  the  Old  Empire  style  (i.e.  3,  8, 
13,  and  18  instead  of  2,  7,  12,  and  17)  and  making  the  correction  of  13 
Cauac  to  3  Cauac,  the  following  result  is  obtained : — 

4  Cauac  was  the  year  bearer.  In  this  year  ended  the  Tun    2  Ahau    3  Mol 

11  Ahau  18  Yaxkin 

7  Ahau  13  Yaxkin 

3  Ahau     8  Yaxkin 

12  Ahau    3  Yaxkin 

8  Ahau  18  Xul 

4  Ahau  13  Xul 

13  Ahau    8  Xul 

9  Ahau    3  Xul 

5  Ahau  18  Tzec 
1  Ahau  13  Tzec 

10  Ahau     8  Tzec 

6  Ahau    3  Tzec 

We  then  find  that  our  Katun  13  Ahau  which  ends  some  time  between 
1536  and  1542  is  the  Katun  13  Ahau  8  Xul  which  corresponds  to 
1 1 -1 6-0-0-0  in  the  long  count,  and  this  will  be  taken  as  the  basis  of  the 
correlation.  If  the  Katun  13  Ahau  did  not  end  in  1539  then  its  positions 
in  the  long  count  would  be  either  12-9-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Kankin  or 
13-2-0-0-0  13  Ahau  3  Zotz.  With  these  three  possibilities  and  taking 
into  account  that  1  Pop  fell  on  July  16th  [O.S.]  in  Landa's  typical  year 
x553>  let  us  take  up  the  astronomical  evidence  in  the  codices  and  on  the 
monuments.1 

-  THE  VENUS  CALENDAR 

The  fact  that  the  Mayas  reckoned  the  Venus  years  in  groups  of  five, 
making  2920  days  equal  to  8  years  of  365  days,  and  that  these  five-year 

!The  one-day  shift.    Some  time  in  the  course  of  the  New  Empire  the  month 
coefficient  corresponding  to  any  day  sign  dropped  one  place.    That  is,  instead  of  a 
round  number  being,  for  example,  10  Akbal  1  Pop  it  became  10  Akbal  o  Pop.   This 
change  may  have  taken  place  in  one  of  two  ways  either 
(0  or  (2) 

9  Ik   o  Pop  9  Ik  o  Pop 

10  Akbal  o  Pop  1 1  Kan  1  Pop 

11  Kan  1  Pop 

That  is,  either  a  day  of  the  month  could  have  been  repeated  twice,  or  a  day  sign 
may  have  been  dropped.  The  writer  is  inclined  to  favor  the  second  method,  as  thereby 
the  long  count  is  less  seriously  affected.  Acceptance  of  the  second  alternative  means 
that  Landa's  typical  year  that  commenced  on  12  Kan  1  Pop  would  by  old  style  have 
been  11  Akbal  1  Pop,  and  therefore  o  Pop  fell  on  July  15th  and  not  July  14th,  as 
would  happen  if  the  first  method  was  followed. 


8  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

groups  were  further  reckoned  in  groups  of  65  Venus  years  equal  to  104 
years  of  365  days,  that  is  5-5-8-0,  exactly  two  calendar  rounds,  is  too 
generally  accepted  to  need  discussion.  The  question  that  has  to  be 
solved  is  as  to  whether  or  not  the  Maya  realizing  that  five  Venus  years 
equaled  2919.6  days  and  not  2920,  took  steps  to  correct  this  error, 
which  at  the  end  of  a  hundred  Venus  years  would  amount  to  eight 
days. 

To  Dr.  John  E.  Teeple  Mayologists  owe  a  great  debt  of  gratitude, 
for  to  him  is  due  not  only  the  discovery  of  the  meanings  of  glyphs  C, 
D,  and  E  of  the  supplementary  count,  but  also  the  method  used  by  the 
Mayas  to  correct  the  Venus  calendar.  He  has  shown  how  the  Mayas 
at  the  end  of  61  years  deducted  four  days,  thus  correcting  the  error, 
and  that  once  in  three  hundred  years  an  eight-day  correction  was  made . 
The  dates  thus  obtained  by  Dr.  Teeple  for  the  commencement  of  the 
Venus  periods  are  as  follows: — 

9-4-17-8-0  1  Ahau  13  Kankin 

9-9-16-7-0  1  Ahau      3  Yaxkin 

9-14-15-6-0  1  Ahau  18  Kayab 

Probably  omitted  1  Ahau  8  Yax,  to  make  an  eight-day  correction. 

9-19-7-14-0  1  Ahau  18  Uo 

10-4-6-13-0  1  Ahau  13  Mac 

1 0-9-5- 1 2-0  I  Ahau      3  Xul 

Dr.  Teeple  then  backs  up  his  argument  with  two  inscriptions  from 
the  monuments. 

Altar  K  at  Copan  has  a  Venus  tun  sign  instead  of  an  introducing 
glyph  and  probably  another  Venus  sign  immediately  after  the  date  in 
Glyph  7.  The  date  of  this  monument  is  9-12-16-7-8  3  Lamat  16  Yax. 
Now  this  date  is  the  end  of  the  37th  Venus  year  after  9-9-16-7-0. 


9-  9-16-7-0     1  Ahau  3  Yaxkin 

3-  0-0-8    37  Venus  years 
9-12-16-7-8    3  Lamat  16  Yax 


Again  the  wooden  lintel  in  Temple  C  at  Tikal  gives  the  calendar 
round  date  11  Ik  15  Chen,  which  it  is  generally  agreed  occupies  the 
position  9-15-12-2-2  in  the  long  count,  and  to  quote  Dr.  Teeple,  "In 
the  immediately  following  glyphs  is  a  statement  that  the  Venus  year 
ended  in  Kayab  24  days  from  a  new  moon  day.  Now  the  10th  year  of 
our  1  Ahau  18  Kayab  Venus  calendar  would  have  ended  on  9-15-1 1-10-0 
4  Ahau  18  Kayab,  and  the  actual  appearance  of  Venus  might  have  been 
a  day  or  two  before  at  16  or  17  Kayab.    There  was  a  new  moon  about 


The  Venus  Calendar  9 

9-15-11-11-3,  just  twenty-four  days  after  17  Kayab,  all  of  which  at 
least  is  in  agreement  with  our  long  count  dates." 

The  writer  now  intends  to  bring  forward  further  evidence  which  he 
believes  will  further  confirm  Dr.  Teeple's  interpretation  of  the  Venus 
Calendar,  and  at  the  same  time  demonstrate  that  the  Mayas  subdivided 
the  Venus  year  into  eight  periods  of  73  days  each.  Again  73  is  the  only 
common  factor  of  365  and  584. 

(1)  Stela  P  at  Copan  opens  with  an  Initial  series  date  9-9-10-0-0. 
In  glyph  B8  there  is  an  Imix- Venus  sign  associated  with  a  head  and  a 
hand,  which  probably  represents  Glyph  C  of  the  Supplementary  series. 
The  combined  glyph  seems  to  mean  a  Venus  year  began  on  the  new  moon 
day.  Now  the  new  moon  before  9-9-10-0-0  fell  on  9-9-9-16-1 1.  Accord- 
ing to  the  tables,  a  new  Venus  year  should  have  begun  on  9-9-9-16-8; 
that  is,  three  days  later.  However,  according  to  the  correlation  fol- 
lowed here  9-9-9-1 6-1 1  plus  the  equations  584285  equals  the  Julian  date 
1948656,  which  was  actually  four  days  after  an  inferior  conjunction  of 
Venus,  the  day  when  Venus  first  appeared  to  view. 

(2)  Altar  R  at  Copan  opens  with  the  date  9-16-12-5-17  6  Caban 
10  Mol,  in  glyph  16  is  a  Venus  sign  and  following  it  in  glyphs  20  and  21 
is  the  date  7  Ahau  3  Zip  which  Morley  places  in  the  long  count  at 
9-1 5-9-13-0.  Now  6  Caban  10  Mol  occurs  on  many  monuments,  but  is 
nowhere  else  associated  with  the  Venus  sign,  we  can  therefore  presume 
that  the  Venus  sign  refers  to  7  Ahau  3  Zip. 

9- 1 5-9- 1 3-0  7  Ahau  3  Zip  occurs  three  days  before  8J4  Venus 
years  from  9-14-15-6-0. 

(3)  In  the  Dresden  Codex  the  last  picture  of  the  lunar  count  repre- 
sents Venus,  and  is  associated  with  the  date  9-1 7-1 7- 14-6.  This  date  is 
one  day  after  182/8  Venus  years  from  9- 14- 15-6-0. 

(4)  Stela  J  at  Quirigua  opens  with  the  date  9-16-5-0-0  8  ahau  8 
Zotz.  In  glyph  C  1  8  ahau  is  repeated,  and  in  glyph  C3  occurs  the  Venus 
glyph  and  in  glyph  C  4  there  is  a  secondary  series  of  one  uinal  and  1  Kin 
subtracting  this  date  9- 16-4- 16- 19  is  reached.  This  is  one  day  after 
18  2/8  Venus  years  from  9- 14- 15-6-0. 

(5)  Stela  K  at  Quirigua  has  a  Venus  sign  in  the  introducing  glyph. 
The  initial  series  reads  9- 18- 15-0-0  followed  by  a  secondary  series  10 
uinalsand  10  Kins,  and  the  date  10  c  18  Kayab  that  is  9-18-14-7-10 
followed  by  a  5  spot  glyph  which  it  has  been  suggested  is  associated 
with  Venus.   This  date  is  48  6/8  Venus  years  from  9-14-15-6-0. 

(6)  Lintel  29  at  Yaxchilan  has  a  Venus  introducing  glyph  followed 
by  the  Initial  Series  date  9-13-17-12-10,  which  is  3  days  before  50^ 
Venus  years  after  9-9-16-7-0. 


io  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

(7)  Stela  24  at  Naranjo  has  Venus  glyph  in  introducing  glyph. 
The  closing  date  of  the  inscription  is  9-13-10-0-0.  This  is  one  day  more 
than  45^  Venus  years  from  9-9-16-7-0. 

Finally  two  doubtful  dates  might  be  added  to  this  list. 

(A)  Altar  S  at  Copan  opens  with  the  date  9-15-0-0-0,  followed  by  the 
statement  5  Katuns  end  of  cycle  10,  then  in  glyph  9  is  a  Venus  sign. 
If  this  refers  to  9-15-0-0-0  and  not  1 0-0-0-0-0,  it  is  one  day  after  2%  Venus 
years  from  9- 14- 15-6-0. 

(B)  Temple  1  at  Tikal  has  a  Venus  glyph  associated  with  a  day  6 
Caban,  which  is  usually  considered  to  be  9- 15- 12-14- 17  in  the  long 
count.  Possibly  6  Caban  is  a  mistake  for  12  Caban  occurring  one  uinal 
earlier.  In  that  case  the  date  would  be  one  day  before  10  6/8  Venus 
years  from  9-14-15-6-0. 

As  the  Venus  year  does  not  constantly  run  to  584  days,  an  error  of 
three  or  four  days  either  before  or  after  the  fixed  date  can  probably  be 
shown  to  be  due  to  the  vagaries  of  the  year. 

These  dates  combined  with  those  already  brought  forward  by  Dr. 
Teeple  seem  to  establish  definitely  that  the  Mayas  did  correct  the 
calendar,  that  9- 14- 15-6-0  was  the  end  of  a  Venus  year  and  that  on  that 
date  Venus  was  either  at  inferior  conjunction  or  on  the  point  of  emerging 
from  the  Sun's  rays  four  days  later. 

THE  LUNAR  CALENDAR 

The  Dresden  Codex  seems  to  indicate  that  a  lunar  count  began  on 
the  day  9- 16-4- 10-8  or  a  day  earlier  or  later.  Presumably  the  date  of 
either  a  new  moon  or  less  likely  a  full  moon  and  possibly  an  eclipse  date. 
Dr.  Teeple's  elucidation  of  glyphs  C,  D,  and  E  of  the  lunar  series  has 
established  the  fact  that  this  date  was  actually  the  basis  from  which 
the  lunar  count  was  reckoned.  Again  there  is  the  possibility  that  no 
intercalation  took  place  and  that  the  recorded  new  moons  did  not  coin- 
cide with  the  actual  appearances  of  the  moon,  but  the  evidence  of  the 
lunar  count  in  the  Dresden  Codex  and  the  Supplementary  Series  on  the 
monuments  definitely  point  to  an  adjustment  of  the  calendar  to  fit  the 
actual  duration  of  the  lunar  period. 

APPLICATION  OF  EVIDENCE  TO  THE  DIFFERENT 
CORRELATIONS 

We  have  thus  four  checks  to  apply  to  any  correlation  based  on  the  as- 
sumption that  the  Maya  calendar  continued  to  function  uninterruptedly 
from  its  inception  till  its  extinction  on  the  arrival  of  the  Spaniards: — 

(1)  That  a  Katun  13  Ahau  came  to  an  end  between  1536  and  1542. 


The  Inauguration  of  the  Calendar  ii 

(2)  That  the  Mayan  year  in  1553  began  on  July  16th  (Julian 
Calendar). 

(3)  That  the  date  9-9-9-16-8  was  within  two  or  three  days  of  either 
an  inferior  conjunction  or  a  heliacal  rising  of  Venus  four  days  later. 

(4)  That  9- 1 6-4- 1 0-8  or  a  day  before  or  after  was  the  date  of  a  new 
moon,  or  a  full  moon,  and  possibly  too  the  date  of  an  eclipse. 

Applying  these  tests  if  13-2-0-0-0  equals  the  13  Ahau  of  the  conquest, 
then  Landa's  typical  year  would  commence  on  the  date  13-3-1-2-4,  and 
the  13  Ahau  Katun  would  end  in  1532.  The  Mayan  date  9-9-9-16-8  with 
the  required  Ahau  equation  of  394485  is  some  forty  days  short  of  a 
heliacal  rising  of  Venus  and  9- 16-4- 10-8  six  days  off  a  new  moon  date. 
Thus  this  correlation  conflicts  with  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  of  our 
postulates. 

If  12-9-0-0-0  equals  the  13  Ahau  of  the  conquest,  then  Landa's 
typical  year  would  commence  on  the  date  12-9- 17-9-4,  an(i  the  13  Ahau 
Katun  would  end  in  1536.  The  Mayan  date  9-9-9-16-8  with  the  re- 
quired Ahau  equation  of  489385  would  fall  some  three  hundred  and 
fifty  days  after  a  helical  rising  of  Venus,  and  eleven  days  after  a  new 
moon  date.  This  correlation  therefore,  while  in  agreement  with  the 
second,  conflicts  with  the  third  and  fourth  postulate. 

If  1 1 -16-0-0-0  equals  the  13  Ahau  of  the  conquest,  then  Landa's 
typical  year  would  commence  on  the  date  11-16-13-16-4,  and  the  Katun 
of  the  conquest  would  end  in  1539.  The  Mayan  date  9-9-9-16-8  with 
the  ahau  equation  584285  falls  one  day  after  an  inferior  conjunction  of 
Venus  (Julian  day  1948652)  and  three  days  before  the  heliacal  rising  of 
Venus.  The  Mayan  date  9-16-4-10-8  with  the  ahau  equation  becomes 
the  Julian  date  1997 133,  a  new  moon  date  falling  on  November  8, 
a.d  755  (Julian). 

Therefore  this  correlation  and  this  alone  fulfills  the  four  conditions 
laid  down,  and  is  therefore  the  basis  of  this  present  correlation. 

THE  INAUGURATION  OF  THE  CALENDAR 

We  have  seen  then  that  the  date  9-9-9-16-8  9  Lamat  6  Cumhu  was 
the  date  of  either  an  inferior  conjunction  of  Venus  or  a  heliacal  rising 
of  that  planet. 

If  the  Venus  calendar  is  now  run  back  four  hundred  and  fifty  Venus 
years,  and  a  correction  of  4  days  for  every  61  Venus  years,  and  four  more 
days  for  the  Complete  300  Venus  years  as  indicated  in  the  Dresden 
Codex  is  made,  the  date  7-13-0-0-0  10  Ahau  13  Pop  will  be  obtained. 
This  I  believe  was  the  date  of  the  inauguration  of  the  Venus  calendar 
just  two  years  after  the  inauguration  of  the  solar  calendar,  which  I 


12  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

believe  took  place  on  the  date  7- 12-17- 16-0  4  Ahau  8  Cumhu.  Now 
this  date  is  removed  exactly  3016  years  of  365  days  from  the  mythical 
beginning  of  the  world,  and  within  less  than  a  day  of  3014  tropical  years. 
In  other  words,  the  Mayas  recovered  both  the  actual  calendar  round 
date,  and  the  same  position  in  the  tropical  year  by  the  following 
equation : — 

7-12-17-16-0        4  Ahau        8  Cumhu        Aug.  13th,  99  b.c. 
-58  Calendar  Rounds 

13-  0-  o-  0-0        4  Ahau        8  Cumhu        Aug.  13th,  31 13  b.c. 

Surely  this  is  the  only  reasonable  explanation  that  has  yet  been 
offered  for  the  choice  of  a  day  three  thousand  years  before  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  calendar  as  the  starting-point  of  Maya  chronology. 

Now  the  date  7-13-0-0-0,  which  we  have  seen  there  is  reason  to 
believe  was  the  date  of  the  formal  inauguration  of  the  Maya  calendar, 
fell  on  10  Ahau  13  Pop.  The  actual  beginning  of  the  year  was  therefore 
7-12-19-17-7  10  Manik  o  Pop.  In  passing  it  might  be  noted  that  here  is 
a  possible  explanation  of  the  sign  Manik.  Manik  is  represented  by  a 
hand,  which  usually  has  the  meaning  of  zero  or  completion.  A  zero 
sign  would  be  very  appropriate  for  the  zero  day  of  the  Maya  calendar. 
7-12-19-17-7  10  Manik  o  Pop  falls,  according  to  the  suggested  correla- 
tions, on  the  Gregorian  date  Aug.  29th,  97  b.c.  Now  the  Carnegie 
Expedition  to  Copan  this  year  showed  that  the  famous  line  of  sight  at 
Copan  marks  either  the  days  April  12th  or  August  30th  in  the  tropical 
year.  Here  possibly  is  an  explanation:  the  line  of  sight  was  erected  to 
indicate  the  day  of  the  year  that  was  the  anniversary  of  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  Mayan  calendar.  There  is  a  reasonable  possibility  that  the 
Mayas  considered  1  Pop  the  New  Year  day.  This  certainly  was  the 
custom  in  Yucatan  at  the  time  of  the  Spanish  Conquest.  But  a  more 
probable  explanation  is  that  the  interval  from  about  9-15-0-0-0  back  to 
7-13-0-0-0  is  slightly  over  800  years,  and  if  the  Mayas  reckoned  the 
year  as  365.24  days,  they  would  in  reckoning  back  from  the  beginning 
of  cycle  nine  consider  August  30th  as  the  o  Pop  of  the  year  in  which 
7-13-0-0-0  10  Ahau  13  Pop  fell,  whereas  by  the  Gregorian  calendar,  which 
reckons  every  400th  year  a  leap  year,  the  date  of  this  first  o  Pop  had 
fallen  to  August  29th.  A  total  eclipse  of  the  sun  visible  all  over  Central 
America  occurred  on  Julian  day  1685880;  that  is,  on  5  Men  8  Pop, 
five  days  before  the  official  inauguration  of  the  count,  and  within  a  day 
of  the  inferior  conjunction  of  Venus  with  the  sun,  or  the  disappearance 
of  Venus  into,  the  sun's  rays.  One  can  well  imagine  what  an  eclat  such 
an  event  must  have  given  the  inauguration  of  the  calendar,  based  as  it 
was  to  such  a  large  degree  on  the  planet  Venus. 


Arguments  Against  the  Correlation  13 

The  Maya  year  therefore  at  the  inauguration  of  the  calendar  had  as 
its  equivalent  in  Christian  dates  the  following  points  of  the  year: — 


0  Pop 

Aug. 

29th 

0M0I 

Jan. 

16th 

0  Muan     June   5  th 

0U0 

Sept. 

1 8th 

0  Chen 

Feb. 

5th 

0  Pax        June  25th 

0  Zip 

Oct. 

8th 

0  Yax 

Feb. 

25th 

0  Kayab   July  15th 

0  Zotz 

Oct. 

28th 

0  Zac 

Mar. 

17th 

0  Cumhu  Aug.    4th 

0  Tzec 

Nov. 

17th 

oCeh 

Apr. 

6th 

0  Uayeb   Aug.  24th 

oXul 

Dec. 

7th 

0  Mac 

Apr. 

26th 

0  Yaxkin  Dec. 

27th 

0  Kankin 

May 

1 6th 

Now  the  meanings  of  the  Maya  months  are  for  the  most  part  obscure. 
Three  only  have  straightforward  translatable  names  that  show  any 
connection  with  the  calendar.  These  are  the  months  Xul,  Yaxkin, 
and  Kankin.  Xul  means  "end,"  and  Yaxkin  means  "new,  strong  or 
green  sun."  Now  Xul,  according  to  the  proposed  correlations,  ran  from 
December  7th  to  December  26th,  and  Yaxkin  from  December  27th  to 
January  15th.  In  other  words  Xul  marked  the  end  of  the  seasonal  year 
when  the  sun  finished  its  journey  southward,  and  Yaxkin  marks  the 
birth  of  a  new  year  when  the  sun  had  turned  on  its  course  and  was 
travelling  northward  once  again.  The  word  Kankin  signifies  yellow 
sun.  Now  this  month  fell  in  May  and  early  June  at  the  time  of  inaugu- 
ration of  the  calendar.  The  sun  at  this  time  of  the  year  is  strong,  and 
cloudy  weather  is  uncommon,  whereas  in  the  following  month  Muan 
the  rains  occur,  and  the  sun  is  often  obscured  for  long  intervals.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Pio  Perez  dictionary,  the  following  month  was  known  as 
Moan  instead  of  Muan,  and  Moankin  means  a  "showery  or  clouded 
day."  Now  Kin  means  "day"  or  "sun,"  therefore  Moan  means 
"clouded."  The  month  Muan  runs  from  June  6th  to  June  25th,  and, 
as  has  been  pointed  out  above,  is  a  period  of  rainy  weather,  and  is 
therefore  very  aptly  named. 

ARGUMENTS  AGAINST  THE  CORRELATION 

Dr.  Morley,  in  his  book  "The  Inscriptions  at  Copan,"  produces  a 
number  of  arguments  against  the  suggested  correlation  after  admitting, 
to  quote  his  own  words,  "No  matter  how  seriously  the  archaeological 
and  historical  (U  Kahlay  Katunob)  evidence  contradicts  the  correlation 
of  the  Long  Count  and  Christian  chronology  indicated  on  page  66  of  the 
Chronicle  of  Oxkutzcab,  the  fact  remains  that  such  a  correlation  was 
actually  in  use  at  the  time  of  the  conquest." 

Dr.  Morley 's  arguments  against  the  correlation  are  as  follows : — 
"(1)  If  11-16-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul  be  substituted  for  the  Katun  13 
Ahau  of  Napot  Xiu's  death,  i.e.  13  Ahau  8  Kankin,  it  will  be  found  that 


14  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

the  katun  of  the  Chichen  Itza  lintel,  namely  10-3-0-0-0  1  Ahau  3  Yaxkin, 
will  fall  some  two  centuries  after  Chichen  Itza  is  said  to  have  been 
abandoned,  and  after  the  Itza  had  moved  to  Chakanputun,  and  a 
century  before  Chakanputun  is  stated  to  have  been  abandoned,  and  the 
Itza  had  moved  to  Chichen  Itza  and  established  themselves  there  a 
second  time.  In  short  this  correlation  would  make  the  Chichen  Itza 
lintel  date  from  a  Katun  1  Ahau,  in  which  the  city  is  definitely  stated  to 
have  been  unoccupied. 

"(2)  If  11-16-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul  be  substituted  for  the  Katun  13 
Ahau  of  Napot  Xiu's  death,  then  Chichen  Itza  was  discovered  in 
9-1-0-0-0-  6  Ahau  13  Kayab,  a  date  actually  prior  to  the  earliest  date  at 
Copan,  and  earlier  than  all  the  Old  Empire  dates,  save  only  the  very 
earliest  at  Uaxactun  and  Tikal,  clearly  an  impossible  situation  from  the 
historic  point  of  view,  since  it  makes  Chichen  Itza  the  contemporary  of 
Tikal,  Copan,  and  the  other  Old  Empire  cities,  instead  of  subsequent  to 
them  as  was  actually  the  case. 

"(3)  If  1 1-1 6-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul  be  substituted  for  the  Katun  13 
Ahau  of  Napot  Xiu's  death,  then  the  opening  entry  of  the  U  Kahlay 
Katunob  .  .  .  occurred  in  8-7-0-0-0,  at  which  time  it  may  well  be 
doubted  whether  the  Maya  had  yet  reached  their  historic  habitat  during 
the  Old  Empire,  since  the  earliest  date  in  that  region,  8-14-10-13-15  on 
Stela  9  at  Uaxactun,  is  a  century  and  a  half  later. 

"(4)  The  Central  capstone  of  the  outer  chamber  of  the  east  range 
of  the  Monjas  Quadrangle  at  Uxmal  presents  the  following  date: 
5  Imix  19  Kankin  falling  in  a  tun  18  of  a  Katun  13  ...  .  The  only 
place  where  this  date  could  occur  within  a  range  of  several  hundred 
thousand  years  was  at  11-12-17-11-1.  5  Imix  19  Kankin  or  3-2-6-19 
earlier  than  11-16-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul,  or,  according  to  the  Oxkutzcab 
correlations  of  the  two  chronologies,  in  1478.  But  by  this  latter  date 
Uxmal  had  already  been  abandoned  for  more  than  30  years;  hence 
this  correlation  flatly  contradicts  the  evidence  furnished  by  this  lintel. 

"(5)  The  ring  on  the  east  wall  of  the  Ball  court  at  Uxmal  presents 
the  following  date:  10  Ix  17  Pop  in  Tun  17  ending  on  the  day  12  Ahau. 
The  initial  series  corresponding  to  this  date  is  11-15-16-12-14.  10  Ix 
17  Pop,  or  only  3-5-6  earlier  than  11-1 6-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul,  that  is 
1536  in  the  Oxkutzcab  correlation.  But  by  this  latter  date  Uxmal  had 
already  been  abandoned  nearly  a  century,  and  the  Spaniards  had 
already  made  their  first  unsuccessful  attempt  to  subjugate  the  country; 
hence  this  correlation  flatly  contradicts  the  evidence  furnished  by  the 
inscription  on  this  ring. 

"(6)  Finally,  the  South  Column  in  front  of  the  Sanctuary  of  the 
high  priest's  grave  at  Chichen  Itza  presents  the  following  period  ending 


Arguments  Against  the  Correlation 


15 


date  2  Ahau  18  Xul  end  of  Tun  11.  The  only  Tun  11  in  a  period  of 
18,707.70  years  which  ended  on  this  date  was  1 1-19-1 1-0-0  2  Ahau  3  Xul, 
or  3-1 1  -0-0  later  than  11-1 6-0-0-0  13  Ahau  8  Xul;  that  is,  in  1609.  But 
by  this  latter  date  Chichen  Itza  had  already  been  abandoned  for  more 
than  a  century  and  a  half,  and  in  fact  the  whole  country  had  been 
under  the  Spanish  rule  for  67  years.  This  is  reductio  ad  absurdum,  and 
compels  the  rejection  of  the  Oxkutzcab  correlation  as  the  proper  aline- 
ment  of  the  long  count  with  Christian  chronology." 

I  am  inclined  to  follow  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Solis  Alcala  that  two  dif- 
ferent tribal  histories  are  interwoven  in  the  Books  of  Chilam  Balaam 
of  Mani  and  Tizimin,  the  histories  of  the  Xiu  and  the  Itza,  whereas  the 
Chilan  Balaam  of  Chumayel  outlines  only  the  history  of  the  Itza. 
I  further  believe  that  a  13  Katun  series  has  been  interpolated,  and  that 
fighting  around  Mayapan  only  occurred  once.  It  seems  too  much  to 
believe  that  in  a  katun  8  Ahau  Mayapan  was  invaded  and  fighting  took 
place,  that  in  the  following  Katun  1 1  Ahau  Mayapan  was  again  invaded 
and  depopulated,  and  that  a  king  Ulmil  should  again  figure  in  the  fight- 
ing, and  that  lastly  on  the  following  8  Ahau  Katun  Mayapan  should 
again  be  depopulated  (Chilam  Balaam  of  Mani).  Furthermore  the 
Chilan  Balaam  of  Tizimin  and  Chumayel  allege  that  the  fighting  at 
Mayapan  just  prior  to  the  arrival  of  the  Spaniards  was  due  to  the  joint 
government.  Now  the  joint  government  came  to  an  end  two  hundred 
and  sixty  years  previously  if  no  Katun  was  interpolated,  whereas  if  an 
interpolation  is  allowed,  the  fighting  on  the  question  took  place  at  the 
end  of  the  joint  government.  Therefore  discounting  for  the  interpola- 
tion and  assigning  the  different  movements  of  the  Itza  and  Xiu  to  their 
proper  order  as  indicated  in  the  Chilan  Balaam,  the  following  tables 
are  obtained: — 


HISTORY  OF  THE 
ITZA 

1 1- 16-0-0-0  13  Ahau 

II-15-O-O-O      2         ■ 
1 1- 14-O-O-O      4        ' 
1 1- 13-0-0-0     6       " 
1 1- 1 2-0-0-0     8       ■     Itza  abandon 
Chichen 

ii-ii-o-o-o  10      " 

II-IO-O-O-O    12  " 

1 1-9  -0-0-0  I  ■ 

1 1-8  -0-0-0  3  ■ 

1 1-7  -0-0-0  5  ■ 

1 1-6  -0-0-0  7  " 


GENERAL 
HISTORY 

1539 

Smallpox 
Pestilence 
End  of  the  war 
Mayapan  invaded 
by  the  Itza  under 
King  Ulmil. 


HISTORY   OF   THE 
XIU 


i6 


Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 


i  1-5  -o-o-o  9 
1 1-4  -0-0-0  11 
1 1-3  -0-0-0  13 


1 1-2-0-0-0  2 

ii-i-o-o-o  4 

1 1 -0-0-0-0  6 

1 0-19-0-0-0  8 

10-18-0-0-0  10 

10- 1 7-0-0-0  12 

1 0-16-0-0-0  1 

10-15-0-0-0  3 

10- 14-0-0-0  5 

10- 13-0-0-0  7 

10-12-0-0-0  9 

10- 1 1 -0-0-0  11 

10-10-0-0-0  13 

10-9-0-0-0  2 

10-8-0-0-0  4 

10-7-0-0-0  6 

10-6-0-0-0  8 

10 


10-5-0-0-0 

10-4-0-0-0 

10-3-0-0-0 

10-2-0-0-0 

10- 1 -0-0-0 

1 0-0-0-0-0 
9-19-0-0-0 
9-18-0-0-0  11 
9-17-0-0-0  13 
9-16-0-0-0  2 
9-15-0-0-0  4 
9-14-0-0-0  6 
9-13-0-0-0  8 
9-12-0-0-0  10 


HISTORY  OF  THE 
ITZA 


Ah  Mex  Cue  King, 
landmarks  taken  from 
water  (?) 

Itza  returns  to  their  homes 
(i.e.  Chichen  Itza). 

Itza  houseless. 

Itza  leave  Champutun. 


HISTORY  OF  THE 
XIU 


Xiu  found  Uxmal  (?) 


Xiu  found  Uxmal  (?) 
Xiu  settle  at  Cham- 
putun Chichen  Itza  de- 
stroyed Xiu  leave. 


Mayapan 
founded  (?) 


Itza  seize  Champutun. 


Itza  abandon  Chichen  Itza. 


Xiu  settle  at  Chichen 
Itza. 

Xiu  discover  Bakhalal. 

Xiu  set  out  from 
Nonoual. 


Pop  put  in  order. 


Itza  settle  Chichen  Itza. 


On  the  acceptance  of  this  chronology  the  first  three  arguments  of 
Morley's  against  the  proposed  correlation  fall  to  the  ground,  and  a 
large  number,  though  by  no  means  all,  of  the  contradictory  statements 
of  the  various  Chilan  Balaam  are  removed. 

Turning  now  to  the  two  dates  which  Morley  states  fall  after  the 
abandonment  of  Uxmal,  I  feel  that  the  second  date,  as  explained  else- 


Arguments  Against  the  Correlation  17 

where,  is  highly  doubtful.     Morley's  interpretation  requires  that  a 

missing  day  coefficient  be  supplied,  that  the  broken  sign  following  the 
,  tun  sign  be  restored  as  an  ahau  sign,  and  finally  that  the  coefficient  of 

this  sign  be  read  as  twelve,  when  it  might  be  12,  13,  or  14. 

Furthermore  I  am  convinced  that  Uxmal  was  occupied,  although  no 
,  longer  the  Tutul  Xiu  capital,  up  to  the  time  of  the  Spanish  Conquest. 

Chichen  Itza  was  certainly  occupied  after  its  abandonment  by  the  Itza 
!  right  up  into  Spanish  times,  as  shown  by  various  extracts  kfrom  the 

Chilan  Balaam  of  Chumayel. 

Finally  the  last  date,  the  date  on  the  temple  of  the  high  priest's 

grave  at  Chichen  Itza,  I  believe,  has  been  wrongly^translated  for  the 

following  reasons : — 

(1)  There  is  no  statement  that  a  tun  n  ends  on  2  Ahau  18  Xul; 
the  statement  reads,  "Tun  11  ends  on  2  Ahau." 

(2)  The  fifth  glyph  appears  to  resemble  the  winged  cauac  sign  with 
the  coefficient  8  which  would  mean  that  2  Ahau  18  Xul  fell  in  a 
tun  eight. 

(3)  If  Morley's  reading  is  correct,  the  old  style  month  coefficient 
was  still  in  vogue  at  Chichen  Itza  one  hundred  and  thirty-four 
years  after  the  new  style  had  been  introduced  at  Uxmal.  Now 
Chichen  Itza,  as  the  religious  and  therefore  astronomical  and 
calendrical  capital  of  the  Mayas,  was  surely  more  likely  to  have 
been  the  first  to  introduce  the  change,  and  not  have  lagged 
behind.  Furthermore,  if  the  view  that  the  change  was  due  to 
Nahua  influence  be  correct, — a  view  that  Morley  accepts, — 
surely  the  change  would  have  occurred  first  at  Chichen  Itza, 
far  and  away  the  greatest  centre  of  Nahua  influence  in  Yucatan. 

1  suggest  therefore  as  the  reading  of  this  text: — 

2  Ahau  18  Xul  occurring  in  a  tun  8.   Tun  11  ends  also  on  2  Ahau. 
(2  Ahau  18  Xul  11-13-7-7-0,  2  Ahau  3  Kayab  11-13-11-0-0.) 

Since  the  publication  of  "The  Inscriptions  at  Copan"  Morley  has 
translated  dates  at  Yula  and  the  temple  of  the  four  lintels  as  1 1-8- 19-5-8 
and  1 1 -9- 1 3-0-0.  This  date  is  on  stylistic  grounds  alone  surely  too  late. 
The  glyphs  appear  to  date  from  the  period  of  the  Initial  series  lintel  at 
Chichen  Itza.  I  suggest  the  following  dates  in  the  long  count  in  place 
of  Morley's  readings:  10-2-12-1-8  9Lamat  11  Yax  followed  by  10-3-13-0-0 
1  Ahau  end  of  Tun  13. 

This  date  is  an  instance  of  the  first  date  not  falling  in  the  tun  that 
closes  the  reading, — a  condition  which  Morley  requires  for  his  interpre- 
tation of  the  date  of  the  High  Priest's  grave. 


1 8  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 

Thus  we  see  that  all  the  historical  arguments  against  the  correlation 
can  be  met.  There  remains  the  question  whether  at  the  time  of  the  con- 
quest a  second  or  third  calendar  was  in  use.  There  is,  as  has  been 
pointed  out,  considerable  evidence  indicating  1536  as  the  year  in  which 
the  Katun  13  Ahau  ended,  and  lesser  evidence  pointing  to  154 1  as  the 
year  in  which  this  same  Katun  ended;  but,  as  no  correlation  can  be 
found  which  will  bring  them  into  line  with  the  astronomical  evidence 
while  maintaining  July  16th  as  the  beginning  of  the  Mayan  year  in 
1553,  we  can  safely  reject  them  as  being  correct.  There  is  always  the 
possibility,  however,  that  more  than  one  calendar  was  functioning  at 
the  time  of  the  Spanish  Conquest,  and  that  whereas  the  13  Ahau  8  Xul 
correlation  was  the  unbroken  count  maintained  from  cycle  seven  times, 
other  counts  had  sprung  up  more  recently,  probably  in  the  sixty  odd 
years  of  disorder  and  anarchy  following  the  fall  of  Mayapan. 


THE  CAAN-KIN-CABAN  GLYPH 

It  has  been  suggested  by  J.  H.  Spinden1  that  this  glyph  has  the  mean- 
ing of  an  observation  of  the  sun  at  the  horizon.  The  bottom  element  is 
the  Caban  sign,  which  is  generally  accepted  to  signify  the  earth;  the 
Kin  element  stands  for  the  sun;  and  the  third  element,  Spinden  sug- 
gests, may  be  the  glyph  for  the  sky. 

This  glyph  is  found  on  a  number  of  different  monuments  at  Copan 
associated  with  the  following  dates.  The  equivalent  positions  in  the 
Gregorian  year,  according  to  the  suggested  correlation,  are  given  in 
parenthesis. 


Stela  8 
Altar  R 
Reviewing 

Stand 
Stela  N 
Altar  L 
Altar  Q 
Stela  11 

8  Altar  2 

9  Altar  Di 
10  Altar  U 


Copan 
Copan 


9-17-12-6-2 
9-i5-9-i3-o 


9  Ik 
7  Ahau 


15  Zip 
3  Zip 


[March  24th] 
[March  21st] 


Copan  9-17-0-3-0  8  Ahau  13  Zip  [March  26th] 

Copan  9-16-10-0-0         1  Ahau  3  Zip  [March  17th] 

Copan  9- 16- 1 1-0-5  2  Chicchan  3  Zip  [March  17th] 

Copan  9-17-5-0-0  6  Ahau  13  Kayab  [Dec.      29th] 

Copan  9-17-5-0-0  6  Ahau  13  Kayab  [Dec.      29th] 

Copan  9-16-18-9-19  12  Cauac  2  Zac  [Sept.     22nd] 

Copan  9-16-13-9-0  13  Ahau  8  Zac  [Aug.     30th] 

Copan  9-16-12-5-17  6  Caban  10  Mol  [July        1st] 


It  will  be  noted  at  once  that  the  first  five  dates  cluster  around  the 
spring  equinox.  Whereas  the  first  and  second  are  probably  within  a 
day,  the  other  three  dates  are  four  or  five  days  off,  but  it  will  be  noted 
that  the  fourth  9-1 6-1 0-0-0  was  a  lahuntun  ending  and  therefore  a  very 

deduction  of  Maya  Dates.  Papers  of  the  Peabody  Museum  of  American 
Archaeology  and  Ethnology,  Vol.  VI,  No.  4,  1926. 


Table  of  Katuns 


19 


important  approximation.  The  date  9-1 6-1 1-0-5  is  three  days  short  of 
the  calendrical  22nd  Venus  year  after  9- 14- 15-6-0,  and  is  probably 
intended  to  mark  both  the  spring  equinox  and  the  Venus  year.  Nos.  6 
and  7  mark  the  hotun  ending  9-17-5-0-0,  a  hotun  approximation  to  the 
winter  equinox.  No.  8  marks  the  autumn  equinox.  No.  9  commemo- 
rates the  introduction  of  the  calendar.  No.  10  is  associated  with  the 
date  6  Caban  10  Mol  falling  on  July  1st,  and  the  connection  is  not  at 
present  apparent. 

On  Stela  B  at  Copan  following  the  initial  series  9-15-0-0-0  4  Ahau  13 
Yax  in  A  10,  1 1  and  12  are  three  glyphs  which  appear  to  be  an  expanded 
form  of  the  Caan-Kin-Caban  glyph.  The  second  glyph  bears  a  strong 
resemblance  to  the  Kin  variant.1 

The  third  glyph  is  a  sure  Caban  sign,  and  the  first  is  in  all  probability 
the  Caan  glyph.  The  date  in  the  tropical  year  of  this  initial  series  is 
August  2 1st.  This  may  be  an  approximation  to  the  O  Pop  August  29th 
of  the  inauguration  of  the  calendar  falling  on  the  important  %  cycle 
date. 

The  same  date  occurs  on  altar  S  at  Copan,  and  in  glyph  6  we  find 
this  same  variation  of  the  Caan-Kin-Caban  glyph,  this  time  occurring 
as  two  glyphs,  the  Kin  to  the  left  with  the  Caan  and  Caban  to  the  right. 

This,  I  believe,  exhausts  the  Caan-Kin-Caban  glyphs  associated 
with  decipherable  dates  at  Copan. 

TABLE  OF  ENDINGS  WITH  THE  GREGORIAN  EQUIVALENTS 
ACCORDING  TO  THE  PROPOSED  CORRELATION 


B.C. 

13-0-0-0-0 

4  Ahau 

8  Cumhu 

Aug. 

13th 

3"3 

7-0-0-0-0 

10  Ahau 

i8Zac 

June 

5th 

353 

7-12-17-16-0 

4  Ahau 

8  Cumhu 

Aug. 

13th 

99 

7-13-0-0-0 

10  Ahau 

13  Pop 

Sept. 

nth 

97 

A.D. 

8-0-0-0-0 

9  Ahau 

3  Zip 

Sept. 

6th 

41 

9-0-0-0-0 

8  Ahau 

13  Ceh 

Dec. 

10th 

435 

9-1-0-0-0 

6  Ahau 

13  Yaxkin 

Aug. 

28th 

455 

9-2-0-0-0 

4  Ahau 

13  Uo 

May 

1 6th 

475 

9-3-0-0-0 

2  Ahau 

18  Muan 

Jan. 

30th 

495 

9-4-0-0-0 

13  Ahau 

18  Yax 

Oct. 

17th 

514 

9-5-0-0-0 

11  Ahau 

18  Tzec       » 

July 

5th 

534 

9-6-0-0-0 

9  Ahau 

3  Uayeb 

March 

22nd 

554 

^ee  S.  G.  Morley,  An  Introduction  to  Maya  Hieroglyphs,  Fig.  34,  c  and  d. 


20 


Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 


9-7-0-0-0 
9-8-0-0-0 
9-9-0-0-0 
9-10-0-0-0 
9-1 1 -0-0-0 
9-1 2-0-0-0 
9-13-0-0-0 
9-14-0-0-0 
9-15-0-0-0 
9-16-0-0-0 
9-17-0-0-0 
9-18-0-0-0 
9-19-0-0-0 
1 0-0-0-0-0 
10- 1 -0-0-0 
10-2-0-0-0 
10-3-0-0-0 
10-4-0-0-0 
10-5-0-0-0 
10-6-0-0-0 
10-7-0-0-0 
10-8-0-0-0 
10-9-0-0-0 
10- 1 0-0-0-0 
10- 1 1 -0-0-0 
1 0-12 -0-0-0 
10-13-0-0-0 
1 0-14-0-0-0 
1 0-15 -0-0-0 
1 0-16-0-0-0 
1 0-17-0-0-0 
1 0-18-0-0-0 
1 0-19-0-0-0 
1 1 -0-0-0-0 
1 1 -1 -0-0-0 
1 1-2-0-0-0 
1 1-3-0-0-0 
1 1-4-0-0-0 
1 1-5-0-0-0 
1 1-6-0-0-0 
1 1-7-0-0-0 


7  Ahau 

5  Ahau 

3  Ahau 

1  Ahau 

12  Ahau 

10  Ahau 

8  Ahau 

6  Ahau 

4  Ahau 

2  Ahau 

13  Ahau 

11  Ahau 

9  Ahau 

7  Ahau 

5  Ahau 

3  Ahau 
1  Ahau 

12  Ahau 

10  Ahau 

8  Ahau 

6  Ahau 

4  Ahau 
.  2  Ahau 

13  Ahau 

11  Ahau 

9  Ahau 

7  Ahau 

5  Ahau 

3  Ahau 

1  Ahau 

12  Ahau 

10  Ahau 

8  Ahau 

6  Ahau 

4  Ahau 

2  Ahau 

13  Ahau 

11  Ahau 

9  Ahau 

7  Ahau 

5  Ahau 


3  Kankin 

3  Chen 

3  Zotz 

8  Kayab 

8  Ceh 

8  Yaxkin 

8U0 
13  Muan 
13  Yax 
13  Tzec 
18  Cumhu 
18  Mac 
18  Mol 
18  Zip 

3  Kayab 

3  Ceh 

3  Yaxkin 

3U0 

8  Muan 

8  Yax 

8  Tzec 
13  Cumhu 
13  Mac 
13  Mol 
13  Zip 
18  Pax 
18  Zac 
i8Xul 
18  Pop 

3  Muan 

3  Yax 

3  Tzec 

8  Cumhu 

8  Mac 

8  Mol 

8  Zip 
13  Pax 
13  Zac 
13XUI 
13  Pop 
18  Kankin 


Dec. 

8th 

573 

Aug. 

25th 

593 

May 

1 2th 

613 

Jan. 

27th 

633 

Oct. 

14th 

652 

July 

I  St 

672 

Marcr. 

1  1 8th 

692 

Dec. 

3rd 

711 

Aug. 

22nd 

73i 

May 

8th 

75i 

Jan. 

24th 

771 

Oct. 

nth 

790 

June 

28th 

810 

March 

l  1 6th 

830 

Nov. 

30th 

849 

Aug. 

1 8th 

869 

May 

5th 

889 

Jan. 

20th 

909 

Oct. 

7th 

928 

June 

24th 

948 

March 

1 2th 

968 

Nov. 

27th 

987 

Aug. 

15th 

1007 

May 

2nd 

1027 

Jan. 

17th 

1047 

Oct. 

4th 

1066 

June 

2ISt 

1086 

March 

8th 

1 106 

Nov. 

23rd 

1125 

Aug. 

10th 

"45 

April 

28th 

1 165 

Jan. 

13th 

1 185 

Sept. 

30th 

1204 

June 

17th 

1224 

March 

4th 

1244 

Nov. 

2ISt 

1263 

Aug. 

8th 

1283 

April 

25th 

1303 

Jan. 

10th 

1323 

Sept. 

27th 

1342 

June 

15th 

1362 

Correlation  to  Planetary  Dates 


21 


n-8-o-o-o 
1 1-9-0-0-0 

II-IO-O-O-O 
II-II-O-O-O 

11-12-0-0-0 

n-13-0-0-0 

11-14-0-0-0 

11-15-0-0-0 

11-16-0-0-0 

11-17-0-0-0 

11-18-0-0-0 

u-19-0-0-0 

12-0-0-0-0 

12-16-0-0-0- 


3  Ahau 

1  Ahau 

12  Ahau 

10  Ahau 

8  Ahau 

6  Ahau 

4  Ahau 

2  Ahau 

13  Ahau 

11  Ahau 

9  Ahau 

7  Ahau 

5  Ahau 

12  Ahau 


18  Chen 
18  Zotz 

3  Cumhu 

3  Mac 

3  Mol 

3  Zip 

8  Pax 

8Zac 

8Xul 

8  Pop 
13  Kankin 
13  Chen 
13  Zotz 
18  Muan 


March 

Nov. 

Aug. 

April 

Jan. 

Sept. 

June 

Feb. 

Nov. 

July 

April 

Jan. 

Sept. 

Feb. 


2nd 

17th 

4th 

2ISt 

6th 
23rd 
10th 
25th 
13th 
31st 
17th 
2nd 
20th 
15th 


1382 
1 401 
1421 
1441 
1461 
1480 
1500 
1520 
1539 
1559 
1579 
1599 
1618 

1934 


APPLICATION  OF  THE  CORRELATION  TO  PLANETARY 

DATES 

Six  dates  from  the  Dresden  Codex  were  converted  into  their  Julian 
equivalents  by  the  addition  of  the  Ahau  equation  584285  and  submitted 
to  the  U.  S.  Naval  Observatory. 

The  dates  were: 

Julian  Equivalent   Supposed  Planet 

2019952  Mars 

2010134  Mars 

1856750  Jupiter 

1856708  Jupiter 

1977799  Saturn 

2019659  Saturn 

The  following  information  was  received  from  Captain  W.  S.  Eichel- 
berger,  U.  S.  Navy,  Director  of  the  Nautical  Almanac: — 

"Calculations  have  been  made  in  this  office  with  the  data  provided 
by  you,  using  the  tables  of  Dr.  Paul  V.  Neugebauer,  with  the  following 
results: — 

Planet 

Mars 

Mars 

Jupiter 

Saturn 

Saturn 


Long  Count 

9- 1 9-7- 1 7-7 
9-18-0-12-9 
8-16-14-11-5 
8- 1 6- 1 4-9-3 
9-13-10-15-14 
9- 1 9-7-2- 1 4 


Julian  Day 

Sun's  Long. 

2019952 

43-2° 

2010134 

84.8 

1856729.7 

82.1 

1977799 

253  -8 

2019659 

112. 2 

Hel.  Long. 

Hel.  Lat 

240. i° 

-0.60 

143.0 

+  1.8 

262. 1 

0.0 

14.7 

-2.5 

335-2 

—  2.0 

22  Correlation  of  Mayan  and  European  Calendars 


Julian  Day 

Geoc.  Long. 

Geoc.  Lat. 

Right  Asc. 

Decl. 

2019952 

270. 30 

-1.60 

270. 30 

-25.2 

2010134 

121. 5 

+  i-3 

124. 1 

+21 .2 

1856729.7 

262. 1 

0.0 

261 .4 

-23-3 

1977799 

9-i 

-2.7 

9-4 

4-  1.1 

2019659 

339-7 

—  2.2 

342.1 

— 10.0 

"For  the  two  dates  given  for  Jupiter  in  your  letter  has  been  substi- 
tuted a  single  date  mid-way  between  the  two;  and  this  proves  to  have 
been  a  date  of  opposition;  which  occurred  on  Julian  Day,  1856729.7." 


FEB 


0/   itfj 
WKASTO  OF  Uik 


